The Middle East: United States Policy and Relations in the Latter Half of the 20th Century
Bobby Beaver, Jeffrey Beaver, Matthew Wilsey
War &amp Peace: The Middle East in Transition

First used by the British
military command during World War 11, the term Middle East is generally used to
describe the region in south western Asia and northeastern Africa.Although the term is relatively new, the
Middle East itself has been home to some of the world's oldest
civilizations.Their ideas and
institutions have spread all over the world, earning the Middle East the name
"Cradle of Civilization".

Although this distinction
suggests a certain degree of uniformity, the Middle East has been host to a
myriad of peoples, ideas, and institutions.Governments arose as early as 3000 BC in the first states of Egypt and
Summer.Despite significant defenses,
invaders would dethrone these institutions and create their own, marking a
trend which would characterize the Middle East until the modem day.Over time, the Middle East and its peoples
have been dominated and influenced by many rules, including the Persian, Roman,
Byzantine, Islam, and Ottoman empires.In addition to direct foreign control, the Middle East has constantly
been subject to outside pressures and influences.

Amidst the political chaos,
many religions and cultures developed and thrived in the Middle East.The three great monotheistic religions:
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam formed there, and dominate religion and
culture in the Middle East today.The
great majority of the people in the Middle East are Muslim- however, Judaism
and Christianity both retain very strong followings.This division is deceptive, though, because both Christianity and
Islam are divided into sects, all of which are represented in the Middle East
and provide for still greater religious diversity and complexity.

This incredible variety and
historical instability has yielded a very diverse population,

which is entirely contrary
to the modem western stereotype.This
variety is largely responsible for the incessant turmoil and volatility which
has characterized the Middle East in the 20th century.Another major reason has been the continued
interference and influence of outside powers on Middle Eastern affairs.This paper focuses on the United States as
an outside power in the Middle East in the latter half of the 20"'
century.It will examine the changing
US policy and its effects in the region over that period.Finally, this paper will speculate on the
future of the Middle East and propose recommendations for future US foreign
policy.

Unfortunately, in examining
US relations with the Middle East, the Middle East cannot be treated entirely
as a whole.Since the end of
colonialism in the 1950s and 1960s, the Middle East has divided into different
states with different peoples, resources, histories, and agendas.The result is a region with very complex
innerstate relations, interstate relations, and international relations.These relations and their long history play
an integral role in policy making.Therefore, in order to understand US foreign affairs with the Middle
East, we need background information on each of the countries.Before it looks at US policy, this paper
will first provide a very brief description of the basic character and history
of the countries most relevant to this discussion of US foreign policy.

The Relevant Middle Eastern States:

The end of the second World
War marked the collapse of the great Ottoman empire which had ruled the Middle
East for over four centuries.This
close was also the beginning of a new era for the Middle East, one of colonial
rule.In 1918, the European powers,
namely Britain and France, gained control of the region until the mid- 1900s,
when the Middle Eastern states gained their independence.

Egypt:

Most Egyptians are
descendants of the ancient Egyptians or the Arabs, who conquered the area in
the 7th century AD.As a
result, Muslims comprise over 90 percent of the population and Arabic is the
national and official language of Egypt.

Egypt is primarily an
agricultural economy, despite the severe lack of arable land. 99 percent of the
63 million person population lives within the Nile Valley and delta, making
these areas among the most heavily populated in the world.This unhealthy situation, together with a
socialized economy and a propensity to fight, have left Egypt in difficult
financial straits.

Driven by the Suez Canal as
a short route to India, the British became involved with Egypt in the late
1800s and controlled it throughout the beginning of the 20thcentury.In 1948, Egypt went to war in an attempt to
prevent the establishment of the state of Israel.This event was the first in a long line of Arab-Israeli conflicts
to come.In many of these cases, Egypt
led the Arab fight.In fact,
politically, Egypt has been the most important Arab country in this respect.It lies between the Eastern and Western
parts of the Arab world, and has constituted the bridge between the two.In addition to its political leadership,
Egypt has also dominated the culture of the Middle East - Egyptian magazines,
books, newspapers, and teachers have flooded Arab cities.These characteristics have made Egypt the
focal point of much US and Soviet foreign policy.Relations between Egypt and the two superpowers have changed
significantly over time, as did its relationship with Israel and the other Arab
states.

Israel:

Although the state of Israel
declared its independence in 1948, its modem history begins with the Zionist
movement - the creation of a home in Palestine for Jewish people.In the early 1900s, Palestine was mostly
Arabic-speaking Muslims and Christians.By World War 1, however, the Zionist movement has gained British favor,
explicit in the Balfour Declaration of 1917.Following the declaration, Palestine saw large-scale Jewish settlement
and development of extensive Zionist agricultural and industrial enterprises.As the population grew, Arab opposition to
Zionism grew. On May 14, 1948, the
independent Jewish state of Israel was established, and the following day the
armies of Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq joined Palestinians in a
war against Israel.

This "War of
Independence" was the first of many conflicts Israel would have in the
remaining half of the 20'hcentury.Israel's national interests have been predominantly focused on
consolidation of her statehood and security - approximately 25 percent of the
GDP is dedicated to national defense.Israel has allied with the United States from its inception, and
benefited from this union the most in the 1960s and 1970s.Fortunately, these decades of fighting may
be coming to a close.Starting with
Egypt in 1978, Israel has come to peace with many of its sworn enemies,
including the PLO in 1994.

Israel has a mixed economy
largely based on the services and manufacturing industries.Years of fighting and occupational
maintenance has inhibited the potential of the economy.Relaxation of Arab relations will be very
important for Israel's economic growth.

Jordan:

The population of Jordan is
almost entirely Arab.The great
majority of the people are Sunni Muslims.Shiite Muslims form a small minority.Islam is the national religion and Arabic is the official language.

Jordan is underdeveloped
industrially, poor in natural resources, and largely too and for
agriculture.It is not economically
self-sufficient, and must depend upon foreign aid.Further burdens were imposed on the economy following the Six-Day
war, in which Israel took the West Bank, and consequently half of Jordan's
agricultural land.Despite this setback
and others, Jordan's free-enterprise economy is developing.

Jordan took advantage of the
Eisenhower doctrine in 1957, which promised American aid to any Middle Eastern
state threatened by "International Communism".By 1970, Jordan had received over $700
million in US assistance, second only to Israel in terms of per capita American
aid.Although it was not a major force,
Jordan participated in all of the Arab-Israeli conflicts, especially after the
seizure of the West Bank.In 1994,
Jordan and Israel signed a peace accord, ending decades of violence.This new peace may yield joint-development
projects which would prove beneficial for both countries.

Lebanon:

Although many Christian
Arabs disclaim Arab ethnicity, about 93 percent of Lebanon is Arab.Just over one-tenth of this Arab population
is Palestinian, who mainly live in stateless refugee camps.Arabic is the official language, but French
is commonly used, especially in the government and among the upper class.English is also widely used, particularly as
the language of business and education.

The Lebanese government
conducts a policy of confessionalism, in
which individuals are grouped according to religion.This policy plays a critical role in the country's political and
social life and has given rise to persistent and bitter conflicts.In the 1940s, the Christians outnumbered the
Muslims, however in the following years, many Muslims immigrated to

Lebanon and the Muslims had
a higher birth rate.Today, 70 percent
are Muslim, and the remaining 30 percent are mostly Christian.

Prior to the Lebanese Civil
War in 1975, Lebanon developed as a free-market economy with minimal government
regulation.Lebanon became the
financial center of the Middle East.The war ravaged both the physical landscape and the economic structure
of the country.As the rest of the
Middle East experienced an economic boom, businesses moved to other economic
centers.Since 1991, Lebanon's economy
has begun to revive.

Of all the Middle Eastern
countries, Lebanon has one of the most complex and fragmented sociopolitical
structures.Each of the various
Lebanese constituencies has its own conception of Lebanon's role in the
regional and international environment.Consequently, each of these groups have allied themselves with regional
or international powers to strengthen their position within the state.In 1975, the country erupted in a civil war
which would not end for a decade and a half In that time, an estimated 130,000
to 150,000 people were killed.Although
the war ended in 1990, the conflict continued both internally and externally,
with Syria and Israel.

Syria:

Syria is chiefly populated
by Arabs, who constitute 90 percent of the population.The Kurds are the largest non-Arab
minority.The overwhelming majority of
the Syrian population is Sunni Muslim.

Syria is a mixed economy
based on agriculture, trade, mining, and manufacturing.Syria is primarily an agricultural
society.Most workers are either crop
farmers or herders.Although the
government controls the marketing of major agricultural commodities, the
industry is dominated by the private sector.Unfortunately, it is also inefficient.Syria is heavily dependent upon aid from the other Arab nations, namely
the oil-producing states.

In the mid-1950s, Syria
appeared increasingly anti-Western and pro-Soviet.Early in the decade, Syria had grown close to Egypt and discussed
a possible federation.The attacks on
Egypt in 1956 by Israel, Britain, and France intensified the growing Syrian
resentment toward the West.The
following year, Syria denounced the Eisenhower doctrine and attacked Turkey for
its US alignment.In 1957 Syria
accepted increasing aid from the USSR.In 1961, Syria and Egypt united as the United Arab Republic (UAR), with
Nasser of Egypt as president.Syria
severed all ties with the US shortly after the Six-Day war, and did resume
relations until after the Yom Kippur War in 1973.In order to maintain the conflict with Israel, Syria split with
Egypt during its settlement with Israel in 1975.Instead, it strengthened its ties with Jordan, and then with the
USSR when it signed a 20-year treaty of friendship and cooperation in
1980.In addition to Israel and
Lebanon, Syria also had trouble with Iraq, because of its support of Iran
during their war.The US has not yet
lifted restrictions on Syria, because of terrorist suspicions.

Turkey:

The territory of Turkey has
been home to ethnically and culturally distinct groups from the ancient
Hittites to Romans and Arabs.The
forebearers of the modern Turk came from Central Asia in the 1200s and imposed
the Turkish language and culture on the population.Turkish remains the official language, and 99 percent of the
population is Muslim.

Farming still engages nearly
half of the labor force.However, the
manufacturing sector has grown considerably.The government maintains a great deal of influence over the economy and
owns several important industries.

After World War 11, the USSR
attempted to include Turkey in its sphere of influence, demanding control of
its eastern provinces and the straits.In response, Turkey accepted aid from, and entered a close military and
economic alliance with the United States.Despite its own internal chaos, Turkey remained faithful to its alliance
with the West, providing military bases for NATO and the US.

Iran:

Just over one-half of the
people of Iran are Persians, the descendants of the original Indo-Europeans who
overran the Middle East in 500 BC.The
remaining population is mixed, with Arabs accounting for just 3 percent.The official language of Iran is Modern
Persian, or Farsi.The official
religion of Iran is the Shiite branch of Islam, which is followed by more than
95 percent of the population.

The Iranian economy is dominated by the petroleum
industry.This sector led to very rapid
growth of the entire Iranian economy in the 1960s and 1970s.In the late 1970s, however, the country was
involved in a civil war as Islamic religious leaders fought to overthrow the
Shah's opressive monarchy.In 1979,
they succeeded in establishing a republic.The Iraqis took advantage of their vulnerable state, prompting a war
which lasted until 1988.The turmoil of
the decade, and a decline in oil prices sent Iran into an economic
downspiral.Iran has broadened its
prospects and is now recovering and growing.

Iran was located at the very
core of the Cold War in the Middle East.Because of its contiguity to the USSR, Iran was intimately concerned by
the territorial issues at stake with the onset of the Cold War.Immediately following World War 11, Iran had
to choose to align with either the US or the USSR.Iran chose the United States, and maintained this relationship through the 1970s.However, the Iranian revolution in 1979
disposed of the US as well as the Shah.The new regime ended the country's close relationship with the United
States, which even resulted in a hostage crisis.This divergence contributed to a soft US backing of Iraq in the
Iran-Iraq war.In 1990, under a new
leader, Iran began to rebuild relations with the United States.However, in 1995, the US cut all trade and investment
in Iran because of their nuclear proliferation and terrorist acts.

Iraq:

Three-quarters of the Iraqi population is Arab.Kurds comprise the rest of the population
and live in the highlands of the country, virtually isolated.Approximately 95 percent of Iraq is Muslim,
and Arabic is the official language.

Agriculture is the mainstay
of the population, but the economy is largely based on petroleum.Most economic institutions are either owned
or controlled by the government.Virtually all sectors of the economy suffered as a result of Iraq's war
with Iran in the 1980s, which left the country with a foreign debt exceeding
$75 billion.The economy was further
devastated by the UN trade embargo following its invasion of Kuwait.

Over the years, Iraq has
participated in all the Arab-Israeli conflicts, although not as a leading
force.In the last two decades, it has
been involved in several conflicts with its Arab neighbors as well.Long-time friction with Iran erupted in the
Iran-Iraq which lasted throughout the 1980s, leaving I million dead and 1.7
million wounded.In 1991, Iraq invaded
Kuwait and alienated the United States in the process.Iraq had always maintained turbulent
relations with the US, ranging from an endorsement of the Eisenhower doctrine
in 1957, to the severance of all diplomatic ties during and immediately following the Six-Day
war.Poor relations continue today, as
Iraq refuses to comply with disarmament agreements.

Kuwait:

Islam is the officialreligion of Kuwait, thus all citizens are
Muslim.However, less than

40 percent of the population
are native Kuwaitis.The remainder of
the population are foreign workers who are not citizens of any country.The official language is Arabic, which is
spoken by all citizens.English is also
taught in Kuwaiti schools.

Kuwait is completely
dependent upon its petroleum.The dry
climate and barren soil have made farming nearly impossible.Large oil revenues have enabled Kuwait to
develop industries and a comprehensive social program for its citizens.Kuwait has one of the highest GNP per capita
in the world.

In the 1960s and 1970s,
Kuwait was a strong voice in support of Arab nationalism and Palestinian claims
to a homeland.Kuwait's only direct
conflict came in 1990, when Iraq accused Kuwait of exceeding OPEC production quotas
and demanded that it drop the debt Iraq owed from its war with Iran.The confrontation resulted in the Persian
Gulf War, in which the United States played a major role.

Saudi Arabia:

Saudi Arabia is mainly
composed of Arabs whose ancestors have lived in the area for centuries.The national language is Arabic, and
virtually all Saudis are Muslims.The
great majority of these Muslims are of the Sunni sect.

Petroleum is by far Saudi
Arabia's most dominant characteristic - is the world's leading exporter of
oil.Saudi Arabia's reserves exceed
over 260 billion barrels, which is over one quarter of the world's supply.Through the sharp increase in oil prices in
1973, Saudi Arabia began to amass a tremendous cash reserve.The government has used this new found
wealth to diversify its industrial base and improve its basic economic
structure.

Saudi Arabia has maintained
a close relationship with the United States since its inception.In 1945, it joined the LJN, and although it
opposed the creation of Israel, it only took a small role in the resultant
fighting in 1948.Saudi Arabla's only
significant inter-Arab conflict has been with Egypt.The Six-Day war seemed to mend this relationship, as the Saudis
expressed full support for Nasser, dispatched 20,000 troops, and suspended oil
exports to the US and Britain.Diplomatic ties were never broken with the US, though.In 1990, Saudi Arabia provided for temporary
deployment on its own territory of hundreds of thousands of US and allied
troops, and contributed forces to the forces that fought Iraq in the Persian
Gulf War.

Palestinians:

Palestine, the historic
region, is situated on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea.Today, it is largely divided between Israel
and the Israeli-occupied territories.The
peoples who have occupied the area have always been referred to as
"Palestinians".In the late
1800s, the Palestinian population was 95 percent Arab.As a result of the Zionist movement, massive
waves of Jews began immigrating into the area, creating a strong Palestinian
(Arab Palestinian) opposition in the process.

The tension grew as it
became more and more certain that Jews would be granted a home of their
own.The Palestinians refused to accept
Jewish statehood and the proposal for a partition.Immediately after the state of Israel was established, five Arab
armies came to the aid of the Palestinians and attacked it.Although the Palestinians outnumbered the
Jews (1,300,000 to 600,000), the latter were better prepared for the war, and
defeated the Arab force.In the
process, Israel expanded its lands, Egypt took the Gaza strip, Jordan took the
West Bank, and 780,000 Palestinian refugees were created.The disinherited Palestinians spread
throughout the neighboring countries, where they have maintained their national
identity and the desire to return to their homeland.

In May of 1964, the
Palestine Liberation Operation (PLO) was formed to "recover their usurped
homes" and replace Israel with a secular Palestinian state.In its early years, the PLO was based mostly
in Jordan, from which it sponsored many commando and terrorist attacks inside
Israel.These raids drew increasingly
devastating reprisals on Jordan, and as a result Jordan and the PLO entered a
brief war in 1970, after which many fled to Lebanon.Like in Jordan, the PLO became a state within a state, and
contributed to Lebanon's disintegration into civil war.In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon to stop the
PLO raids from across the northern border.The invasion weakened the organization, and scattered its members across
the Middle East.

In an effort to gain US
favor and the opportunity to discuss peace and self-rule, the PLO recognized
Israel's sovereignty in 1988.The PLO
lost a lot of its bargaining power in 1991, when it supported Iraq during the
Gulf War.However, in 1993, Israel and
the PLO revealed a surprise peace accord that opened the way for limited
Palestinian self-rule in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

US Middle Eastern Policy:

While German and Japanese
surrender had brought the close to one great war in 1945, it also marked the
onset of another, the Cold War.World
War 11 had forever changed the international balance of power, leaving the
United States and the USSR to dominate the world's political scene.

This fact had a profound
impact on US foreign policy, including policy toward the Middle East.During the Cold War, US foreign policy was
completely dependent on Soviet strength, position, and action.For this reason, the Cold War divided modem
US foreign policy towards the Middle East into two distinct periods: policy
during the Cold War and policy after the Cold War.

US Middle Eastern Policy During the Cold War:

After a century of
friendship, Americans and Russians became archenemies in 1917 when the
Communists seized power, established the Soviet Union, and declared ideological
war on the capitalist nations of the West.The two countries joined to fight the Germans in World War 11, but this
union dissolved when the Russians used its forces to gain control of Eastern Europe
towards the end of the war.In response,
the US moved to unite the rest of Europe under American leadership.The competition and conflict between these
two nations would characterize the geopolitical climate for the next 40 years,
as they both struggled advance their own influence, while stunting their
enemy's.Ultimately, the Cold War was a
conflict between two ways of life, two variant, competitive, and incompatible
definitions of modernity.

The overriding concern of
American foreign policy following World War 11 was finding an effective way to
check Soviet expansion and influence throughout the world.In the Middle East, this meant preventing
the Soviets from filling the void left by the end of Britain and France
colonialism.The second major interest
in foreign policy was to maintain and strengthen access to facilities and
resources in the Middle East.The
Middle East is a crossroads which links three continents: Europe, Asia, and
Africa.Consequently, the US has been
interested in its many strategic locations, which include waterways like the
Turkish Straits, the Persian Gulf, and the Suez Canal.Perhaps even more important than these
positions, however, is the region's vast petroleum reserves.The significance of this resource to an
industrialized nation cannot be overstated.Without oil, the United States' force would be crippled, and probably
disabled completely.

In an effort to achieve
these two main objectives, the United States developed two doctrines to serve
as means to those ends: (1) the promotion of peace and stability, and (2) the
recruitment of partners in the Middle East to help contain Soviet
expansion.Policymakers reasoned that
chaos and commotion in the region would allow the Soviets to promote and foster
their ideals in unstable, conflicted states.Thus, by preventing change, the Russians are blocked and the US has a
chance to facilitate control.Recruitment of regional partners also worked toward this same end.This effort would preserve the territorial
and political status quo, halting any Soviet progress.

THE PROMOTION OF PEACE AND
STABILITY:

The United States first
implemented the peace doctrine in 1950, amidst strong Arab-Israeli tensions,
The US made an effort to maintain the status quo by promoting stability and
deterring regional warfare with the Tripartite Declaration.The US joined Britain and France in issuing
this statement of policy which sought to keep military capabilities reasonable,
to promote
peace and stability generally, and to prevent changes in the established
boundaries via military force.The
declaration was a rudimentary and ineffective way of keeping peace, however, it
was a clear statement of Western foreign policy.

In a blatant contravention
of the Tripartite Declaration, Britain and France conspired with Israel to
attack Egypt and overthrow Nasser.The
conflict came to a head in 1956, when Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, which
the British and French had invested heavily in.Israel responded by invading the Sinai Peninsula, and British and
French forces established control over the canal within days.The attack was met with an immediate
condemnation by President Eisenhower, which represented a steadfast adherence
to the Tripartite Declaration as the means to maintaining peace and stability.

In the early 1960s, the
United States made another effort to promote peace and maintain the status quo
in the Middle East.President Kennedy
made a concerned attempt to sympathize for a broad range of states.More specifically, Kennedy tried to repair
US relations with the Arab states by making overtures to Nasser in Egypt, and
by reaffirming continuing support in Saudi Arabia and Jordan.Israel was dealt with in a broader context
of building good relations with many states.Like the Tripartite Declaration and the Suez crisis, these moves did not
lead to a significant improvement of the relations with the Arab nationalist
countries.However, these policies did
affirm the US commitment to its policy of peace and stability.

REGIONAL RECRUITMENT AND
SOVIET CONTAINTMENT:

The United States also
closely followed the recruitment policy in the beginning of the Cold War.During World War 11, Allied troops occupied
Iran in order provide an overland route through Iran which allowed for shipment
to the USSR.In 1945, when more
effective routes were secured, Iran requested that the troops withdraw.After prolonged negotiations, the US,
Britain, and the Soviets consented.In
June of that year, the USSR refused to leave and began to press Iran for the
immediate formation of a Soviet-Iranian oil company.Intimidated by the force of the request and worried about its
proximity to the Soviets, Iran turned to the United States for help.This indirect confrontation was the first
significant conflict of the Cold War.The US responded with itssupport, and Iran rejected the Soviet
offer and denied subsequent Soviet encroachment.The United States succeeded in containing the Soviets, and in
creating a tie with the Shah of Iran which bound the two nations until his deposition
in the Iranian revolution of 1979.

Undeterred by the conflict
over Iran, the Soviets pressed their interests in other Northern Tier countries
like Greece and Turkey.The United
States responded in March of 1947 with the Truman Doctrine.The doctrine provided over $400 million in
aid to Greece and Turkey to help them repel the ominous communist force.This proposal formed the initial basis of
Soviet containment in the Middle East.The effect on Turkey was particularly successful.Throughout most of the war, Turkey remained
faithful to its alliance with the West, providing military bases for NATO and
US forces.In the case of these
northern countries, the US hoped to create a barricade of sorts to inhibit
Soviet expansion into the heart of the Middle East.

The US sought to reproduce
this success of the regional recruitment policy in other Middle Eastern
states.In 1955, Iraq joined Turkey,
Britain, Pakistan, and Iran in a five-year defense treaty named the Baghdad
Pact.Although the United States was
not a member, the Pact had been designed by US officials, and the US was
represented on various committees.The
US had pushed for the settlement to align Iraq with the west and reinforce
Western ties with the other Arab countries.Unfortunately, the Baghdad Pact was largely ineffective.The Iraqis left the alliance early, and
their presence had not enticed any other Middle Eastern countries to join.

Ironically, US efforts to
block Soviet expansion by enlisting unions with the Northern Tier countries
left the southern Arab countries open to USSR influence.Despite Eisenhower's intervention in the
Suez crisis, US relations with Egypt had deteriorated and the Soviets were
making significant inroads there.

Egypt was particularly
important in the Middle East.Undoubtedly, it was the central Arab nation, and thus, took the
leadership position in most all the Arab-Israeli conflicts.An anti-West sentiment was growing
throughout the Arab nations, so Nasser was using the Soviets to advance his
agenda.This alliance could quickly
spread to the rest of the Arab countries, and so the United States responded
immediately.On January 5, 1957,
President Eisenhower asked Congress to authorize economic and military
assistance to any country in the area that requested it, and to approve the
employment of American troops to protect states "against armed aggression
from any nation controlled by international communism." The proposal was
soon passed, and became known as the Eisenhower Doctrine.Once again, the US was trying to expand its
pro-Western base and contain the Soviets.

Although the doctrine seemed
appropriate from the US perspective, it demonstrated little interest in the
concerns of the Arab countries.It
focused almost exclusively on the American preoccupation with the Cold War.In contrast, the USSR expressed considerable
sympathy for the Arab position, especially with respect to Israel, a stance
which the US would not be able to take.

By the 1960s, the American
relationship with the Middle East, and the Arab world in particular, had
deteriorated.Attempts to bring key
countries into the US security system had failed in the absence of a realistic
regional approach.Aside from the
successes in the Northern Tier, the US had made relatively insubstantial
progress in promoting peace and stability and enlisting regional partners to
strengthen its position in the Cold War.

Unsatisfied with progress in
the Middle East, the US took a new approach to the same designated tasks of
peace and regional recruitment.Although the results were often more dramatic, ultimately the new
mentality was probably no more effective.It can be best characterized by the new proactive stance it took in the
Arab-Israeli conflict through a commitment to Israel.

This relationship has been
the most consistent and least questioned aspect of the US Middle East
policy.Just prior to, and following
its independence, the question of Israel was a controversial one in the United
States.Policymakers knew that the
creation of a Jewish state in an Arab world would destabilize the Middle East
and facilitate Soviet intrusion.However, the pro-Israel pressure was tremendous.Before long, Jewish forces had convinced
politicians and the country to support Israel.Key officials were subject to a constant barrage of pro-Israel
figureheads and Jewish leaders.In
addition, the Jewish community were a substantial and powerful contingency for
elected politicians and for hopefuls in elections.Graphic images served as reminders to the general population of
the hardships and suffering the Jews endured during the war.The country was gradually consumed in the pro-Israel sentiment.On a more subtle level, the nation was
naturally more inclined to support the Jews: the Arab culture, and consequently
their situation was "foreign" and difficult for Americans to identify
with.All of these factors contributed
to a momentum which ultimately left policymakers without any choice but to
support the new nation.

Despite this strong support
for Israel, the policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict was subordinated to the
broader policy of holding the line against Soviet advance by building a more
active system of containment.This was
the commitment, in theory.The United
States wanted to project an image of impartiality.However, the relationship with Israel polluted that image, and
contributed to a general feeling of distrust by the Arabs.

In the meantime, the US felt
that they had "lost" Egypt to the Soviets, who were now supplying
Nasser with military aid.The US
perceived the relationship as a threat, and reacted by selling defensive
weaponry to Israel in 1962.In 1966,
the strained relationship with Egypt was severed altogether when the United
States decided on a policy of noncooperation.The US ceased aid and refused to help Cairo locate funds for development
projects.At the same time, the
alliance with Israel was strengthened.The US started selling offensive weapons to them, despite a legal
restriction against the sale of anything but defensive weapons.Convinced that Egypt was the major threat to
American interests in the Middle East, the US tacitly consented to an Israeli
military assault on Egypt as a way of dealing with Nasser's blockade of the
Strait of Tiran.An Israeli victory
would discredit Nasser, and possibly destroy the relationship with the Soviet
Union.It was imperative that Israel
win, though, because a defeat would achieve just the opposite.Hence, the US shipped military equipment and
ammunition to Israel to facilitate the invasion.

Through its actions, the
United States showed that the benefits of close ties with Israel were usually
considered more important than strained relations with the Arabs.War was not a good long-term solution, but
the US was satisfied with the situation after the war.The US sought to preserve this balance of
power, which served as a kind of status quo.The stalemate would postpone conflict resolution indefinitely and help guarantee the
retention of the occupied territories.

In addition to using Israeli
in order to stall political action in the Middle East, the US was willing to
use her as an indirect military force.In September of 1970, civil war broke in Jordan between the PLO and King
Hussein.The conflict soon had global
implications as the US assumed that the Soviets were using the upstarts as surrogates
in an effort to dethrone the king.President Nixon's exact assessment was that “We could not allow Hussein
to be overthrown by a Soviet-inspired insurrection.If it succeeded, the entire Middle East might erupt in war....
the possibility of a direct US-Soviet confrontation was uncomfortably
high.It was a ghastly game of
dominoes, with nuclear war waiting at the end." Unable to send US troops,
Nixon alerted the Israelis to be ready to act if necessary.The troops did mobilize, however it war was
averted as the PLO backed down.

The partnership with Israel
had been reaffirmed, and the relationship really became an alliance which the
US would not abandon.The United States
was also committed to the stalemate in the Middle East as a temporary solution
to the goals of peace and Soviet containment.Therefore, despite vigorous attempts by Anwar Sadat, the new president
of Egypt, to demonstrate his moderation and interest in developing a
relationship, the US showed no interest.Confronted with Arab nationalism and a desire to regain the occupied
territories, and unable to break the impasse by political means, Egypt moved
toward military action.On the Jewish
holiday of Yom Kippur in 1973, Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia attacked
Israel.Although Israel ultimately
prevailed, the attack had caught them off-guard.The war and the ensuing oil embargo scared the United States and
forced them to reconsider the stalemate policy and their alliance with Israeli
relations.

Following the Yom Kippur
War, the Nixon administration moved to alter the US relationship with the Arab
nations by playing a more active and less partisan role in truly resolving the
Arab-Israeli conflict.This change was
still in a theoretical stage in the
1970s.However, it was a good first
step towards real peace, which became a realistic possibility with the decline
of the Soviet Union and the Cold War in the 1980s.

The Middle East hosts an
extremely complex and convoluted social and political environment.Although the region is newly independent,
the people of the Middle East have a full and varied history which dominates
most of the political scene.Unfortunately, this history has created rifts and divisions within
countries and between countries which has resulted in years of war and
revolution.The onset of the Cold War
introduced the United States, the Soviet Union, and their respective ideologies
into the region as well.The
superpowers used the instability and vulnerability of the Middle Eastern
countries to advance their own interests.Because of its strategic location and its requisite petroleum resources,
the Middle East became the stage for an intense competition between the two
superpowers.The dominant theme of this
rivalry was Soviet persistence to build a powerful security belt on its
southwestern border, accompanied by an American determination to contain that
expansion and to construct alliances of its own.

In an effort to check Soviet
encroachment and to maintain and strengthen access to strategic positions and
resources in the Middle East, the United States adopted a policy to promote
peace and stability, and to create regional alliances.The US immediately succeeded in deterring
Soviet expansion into its neighboring Northern Tier countries by creating
alliances with Iran, Turkey, and Greece.Despite this initial success, the US failed at peace attempts and
inroads with other nations.During the
first two postwar decades, the United States made relatively insubstantial
progress on its Middle East objectives.This ineffectiveness, together with the perceived success of the USSR,
led to a change in the methods used to achieve peace and recruitment.Mainly, this change involved a union with
Israel which the US would use to realize its goals.This policy also proved inadequate.The alliance strained relations with the Arab countries, thereby
facilitating Soviet intrusion.The
situation had created a stalemate in the Arab-Israeli conflict which served as
a temporary status quo.After the war
in 1973, the United States began to consider the possibility of true peace in
the Middle East, especially after the weakening of the Soviet Union.

US Middle Eastern Policy Following the Cold War:

All policies that the United States has adopted
toward the Middle East, since World War 11, have been configured to contain
Soviet aggression.Following the
gradual decline of the Cold War, however, the United States policy toward the
Middle East has subsequently changed and developed.Instead of acting primarily as a thwarting force against the
Soviet Union influence in the Middle East, our foremost role evolved to one of
promoting peace and modernization.

There exists much debate as
to when the Cold War in the Middle East actually ended and the threat of Soviet
aggression ceased.Some argue that this
was achieved with Gorbachev's inauguration while others argue that the Soviet
threat died with the Iranian Revolution.The period of Soviet absence is paramount to discussion because it
directly effects the United States' interests, motivations, and goals in the
Middle East.After all, the Soviets
were the chief reason the US became involved in the region after World War
11.The Soviet threat gradually died along
with the Iranian Revolution, Iran-Iraq War, and the geographical change of
Soviet territory in the Middle East.

DECLINE OF THE COLD WAR IN
THE MIDDLE EAST

Muhammed Reza Shah Pahlavi
came to power in Iran in 1941 with the support of the United States, Great
Britain, and France.The United States
had a very close relationship with this leader as exemplified by the covert US
aid (from the Central Intelligence Agency) to overthrow his enemy, Prime
Minister Muhammed Mossadegh.Pahlavi
introduced a White Revolution of rapid modern development and socioeconomic
reform in the early 1960s.During this
time, he introduced many Western ideas, such as equal fights for women and
secular education.These new policies
stemmed directly from the United States influence of modernization in the
area.Iran's position, size, and
resource wealth made it a exceedingly important ally to the United States...
Iran had become a power of universal importance.

Despite the economic
prosperity of Iran in the 1970's, there existed great internal opposition
toward the autocratic rule of Pahlavi and the new western ideals, induced
mainly by conservative religious leaders.The Shah's reaction to this hostility was quite oppressive as he
catalyzed his secret police, the Savak, to subdue all efforts of opposition.The conservative Shiite Muslims, who wanted
the nation to be governed by Islamic law, subsequently led riots in several
Iranian cities.Their leader, Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini, a cherished Muslim clergyman and long time adversary of the
Pahlavi regime, was also very angered by the foreign influences in the
country.According to Khomeini, modem
policies introduced by the United States and other foreign influences violated
Islamic traditions.By late autumn, the country
was essentially in a state of civil war.In January 1979, Khomeini's followers had forced the Shah to flee,
marking the end of his 37-year rule over Iran.Khomeini returned and a new constitution was passed that declared Iran
an Islamic Republic.

As the political tables
turned, the new regime marked the end of the country's close relationship with
the United States.Furthermore, when
militant Iranians stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and captured 66 American
hostages, Iran sentiment could definitely be qualified as anti-American.Iran viewed both the Americans and Soviets
as the oppressors and, to the best of their ability, tried to demonstrate that
they would not condone such superpower activity.After Iran condemned the Soviet Union for occupying Afghanistan,
they had essentially joined both the United States and the Soviet Union against
itself Iran, long believed to be the "strategic prize" (Amirahmadi,
49) of both the United States and the Soviets was taking them both on at
once.It became even clearer that the
flame between United States and Soviets in the Middle East had vanished from
the Iran-Iraq War.

In September 1980, the
long-standing rivalry between Persian Iran and Arab Iraq exploded as Iraq
invaded Iran with hopes of reversing a 1975 border settlement and to gain
control of the very rich, oil-producing province of Khuzestan.Saddam Hussein, ruler of Iraq, also feared
the religious propaganda that Iran began to spread throughout Iraq, Khomeini
and most Iranian Muslims belonged to the Shiite sect of Islain and Hussein
feared this propaganda because Iraqi Shiites comprised 60 percent of the
country's population.The United States
and the Soviets, thus, tilted toward the support of Iraq, intending to contain
the spread of Khomeini's revolutionary intentions."Indeed, throughout the eight years of the Iran-Iraq war,
the USSR and USA were supporting the same side, Baghdad, against Khomeini's
revolutionary programme"(2).

Clearly from both the
Islamic Revolution in Iran and the Iran-Iraq War, the main division and
conflict was not that of the Cold War, but that of the Islamic Revolution and
the states that were opposed to it.

Beyond the policy and
strategic adjustments that the United States and the Soviets

made, a more broad change in
the area had a very powerful effect on the dwindling power of the Soviets in
the Middle East.Russia's abandonment
of Transcaucasia and Central Asia greatly contributed to their strategic
retreat from Middle Eastern affairs.For the first time intwo centuries, Russia lacked a common
border with the Middle East."[Russia] became a country with a policy relationship more like
that of Western European countries - Britain, France, Germany - and more
dependent on whatever economic links it could build from afar” (Yezik,
20).This geographic retrenchment of
Russia certainly marked an important limitation for economic, political, and
military relations in the Middle East.

The Islamic Revolution in
Iran, the Iran-Iraq War, and Russia's geographical change all contribute
significantly to the end of Soviet threat in the Middle East.Again, this is critical in the shaping of
U.S. involvement and policy in the Middle East.

U.S. CHANGING POLICY WITH
ABSENCE OF SOVIET THREAT

Without the Soviet threat in
the Middle East or challenges from other opposing nations, the United States
gained the opportunity to give more attention to its core interests in the
Middle East: peace and oil.Richard
Burt, director of the State Department's Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs
under Reagan's administration, stated the nation's prime interests in the
Middle East during a subcomniittee meeting on March 23, 198 1. At the very top
of the list was to, "Ensure continued western access to the oil of the
Gulf in adequate quantity and at a reasonable price"(Wells, 7).The US dependence on Middle Eastern oil
imports is the subsequent reason to devote much attention to peace in the area.

In developing a plan called,
"A Political Military Strategy for the Persian Gulf and Southwest
Asia," Bruce Kuniholm emphasizes the U.S. dependency on oil in the Middle
East.He states, "The continued
stockpiling of oil, together with the U.S. failure to establish a comprehensive
energy program, underscores the vulnerability of the United States to embargoes
and other political/military measures that could disrupt the flow of oil from
the Gulf '(Wells, 306).It is certainly
an imminent reality that the United States has been and will continue to be
economically dependent on the region.Thus, the U.S. must work very hard to develop peace in order to maintain
a constant flow of oil at a reasonable price.

With the ending rivalry with
USSR (and especially after the Gulf War), U.S. foreign policy now had the
opportunity to spread peace by (1) advancing the Arab-Israeli peace process,
and (2) by having the ability to select which countries to deal with.The significant peace processes that ensued
during this time period include the Camp David negotiations (and resulting
Israeli-Egypt peace treaty), the Israel-Syria peace treaty and the more recent
Israeli Palestinian peace treaty.

The Camp David negotiations
were an attempt by President Carter to develop some sort of resolution to the
ongoing strife in the Middle East and, specifically, between Israel and
Egypt.The invasion of Israel in the
Six-Day War and Egypt's response, the Yom Kippur War, had engendered much
impending disharmony between the two countries.In September 1978, Carter met with Egyptian President Anwar Sadat
and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin in Camp David, Maryland.Together, the three of them agreed on a
framework for peace later named the Camp David Accords.The treaty required that Israel withdraw
entirely from the Sinai Peninsula, land taken from the Six-Day War
invasion.It was signed in Washington
D.C. on March 26, 1979.

Another example of the
United States policy and actions as the "superpower moderator," is
the Israeli-Palestinian peace accord.This treaty also began as a result of territory that the Israelis seized
in the Six-Day War.The territories
under dispute lie in the southern portion of the West Bank which Israel call
Judea and Samaria, their earlier names.In 1993, the Israeli-Palestinian peace accord was established and, as a
result, most of the portion of Judea was transfer-red to the Palestinians by
December 1995.

These are some of the many
examples that exhibit the United States' "fatherly" moderation role
in the Middle East resulting from the termination of Soviet threat.In order to ensure that our tap to the
Middle Eastern oil fields, it has been crucial that the United States work to
the best of its ability to promote peace.

ANALYSIS OF U.S. POLICY AND
POSITION IN THE MIDDLE EAST:

The potency of the United
States as a catalyst for peace in the Middle East, however, can be
disputed.Certainly the obstacle
thwarting the United States gospel of peace is the insecurity of the Middle
Eastern countries to trust the U.S., and each other.According to Richard Burt, "Only when local states feel
confident of U.S. reliability and secure against Soviet threats, will they be
willing to take necessary risks for peace"(Wells, 7).President Reagan sought to form consensus
with certain countries including Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and
Israel.Unfortunately, however, this
becomes an unlikely venture for Arab countries because of the longstanding U.S.
support for Israel.Arab nations have
viewed the United States only as an "accomplice"(Security 7) to
Israel in its political decisions.The
Arab perception that Israel could lobby tremendous U.S. military and economic
support agitates these countries even more and assuredly weakens the United
States role as a mediator / policy implementor.

The US still had certainly
made progress in the advancement of the Arab-Israeli peace process, however, no
major investment was made to amend the lurking strife in the Gulf Region.Many historians condemn the lack of U.S.
strategy and action to maintain peace in this unstable region.The United States devoted most of the
foreign policy effort to establishing peace between Israel and its adversaries
instead.It appears, however, that not
much could have been done in order salvage the reckless Gulf region.This demonstrates the fact that long-term
interests of the United States are threatened just as much by Soviet aggression
into the Middle East as local rulers who only represent their class interests
and present "United States as an accomplice in oppressive internal
policies"(Wells, 9).Such is the
situation that developed in the Islamic Revolution in Iran and the Persian Gulf
War.

U.S. POLICY AND THE PERSIAN
GULF WAR

The border that Iraq and
Kuwait shared in the Middle East had been a long-time focus of tension between
the two countries.Kuwait was a part of
the Ottoman Empire in the 18th Century until it received British protection in
return for autonomy in local affairs in 1899.Britain granted Kuwait independence in 1961.The constant clashes at the Iraq-Kuwait border were a direct
result of Iraq's claim that Kuwait had been governed as a part of the Ottoman
Empire in a southern province of Iraq and, thus, belonged to Iraq.This claim certainly had little historical
basis, however, exacerbated both countries' relations and led to Iraq's
invasion in 1990.

On August 2, Iraq had
assumed control of Kuwait City and subsequently installed a puppet
government.Immediately, the United
States and the entire world began to develop strategies to contain Iraqi's rash
inclination to further warfare (with chemical weapons and missile
attacks).Iraq had strategically
stationed troops to strike against Saudi Arabia and many Arab countries,
including Egypt and Syria, were very intimidated by Iraqi threats.

The United States, acting as
the superpower moderator, sent more than 400,000 troops a week after the
invasion.The U.S. was soon joined by
2OO,OOO troops from Saudi Arabia, Great Britain, France, Kuwait, Egypt, Syria,
Senegal, Niger, Morocco, Bangladesh, Pakistan, the UAE, Qatar, Oman, and
Bahrain.Other countries contributed to
the cause by commuting ships and air force.These countries include Canada, Italy, Argentina, Australia, Belgium,
Denmark, Greece, Nor-way, Portugal, Spain, Czechoslovakia, New Zealand, the
Netherlands, Poland, and South Korea.Japan and Germany also contributed financially.The United States led the force that
eventually caused the collapse of Iraqi resistance and the recapture of Kuwait
on February 28.

The United States policy and
intentions toward the Gulf Crisis were perceived as leading a "moral
crusade" against Saddam Hussein's despotic oppression.President Bush even rallied the nation by comparing
Saddam Hussein to Hitler.Although this
"moral" portrayal was accelerated much by both the Bush
administration and the media, it represented a distortion of reality: the
United States had much to gain and uphold from its involvement in the Gulf Foremost
acting as the major (1) moderator and (2) oil client, this Crisis required U.S.
involvement in order to maintain access to oil reserves and the integrity of
its alliance system in the Middle East.This also provided an opportunity for the United States to offset its
declining power in the global economy and to make it clear to the Middle
Eastern countries that the United States is boss.

US Middle Eastern Policy in the Post-Gulf War Era:

The void in direction since the end of the Cold War
that continued during the Gulf War and is still evident today, has left in its
wake numerous unanswered questions of what the role of the United States should
be.The Middle East in particular has
been of particular concern.Specifically the case of Iraq presents the most dangerous
situation.It is a very volatile region
where tensions are easily flared.Although the allies, led by United States' forces easily handed defeat
to Saddam Hussein and his troops, danger still remains not only from Iraq, but
the whole Middle East.There are
serious issues and agendas for the United States to consider today.Issues of critical importance that need to
be investigated are, what are the U.S. interests in the region, what are the
strengths and weaknesses of the United States' armed forces capabilities, what
is essential to protect interests, and finally what would be a goal or
recommendation for the United States to ascertain in the future.

GULF WAR BENEFITS:

What did the United States
gain as a result of Desert Storm?According
to General Schwarzkopf, "We have thrown back aggression and restored
conditions in which interests of regional stability can be pursued and
advanced." Therefore we have
created a more peaceful environment in which the region was secure for economic
prosperity.It also enabled the
military to test its new technologies, which it had been developing since the
end of the Vietnam War, in an active theater of conflict.The recent shift in the global environment
during the past decade has forced the Department of Defense (DOD) to alter its
practices.No longer is the United
States threatened by a global superpower such as the former Soviet Union.Today, the risks and dangers stem from
regional conflicts that require smaller, better trained and equipped forces
that are able to neutralize threats before they escalate into larger
situations.The politics that
correspond to the end of the Cold War has mandated reductions in military
spending across the board.This puts a
strain not only on current forces, but eliminates the prospect for growth and
innovation, or a revolution in military affairs (RMA).Originally coined the "Offset
Strategy," it gave the

United States a qualitative
advantage that offset the quantitative advantage enjoyed by the Soviets.Although the name has changed to RMA, it
still gives flexibility and adaptability in warfare.

The first step in
understanding RMA is to look at the technical background.RMA has given the United States a paramount
advantage during warfare and peace keeping missions.This has not been more evident then the recent Gulf War.The Iraqi military, with more than I million
personnel and four thousand tanks, mainly Soviet built T-72s, was the fourth
largest in the world.The war with Iraq
was not a case of a larger nation simply bullying over a much weaker
military.Iraqi soldiers had fortified
their positions within Kuwait establishing a perimeter to the South, on the
Saudi Arabia border, and to the East, along the Persian Gulf The United States
not only needed to assemble its troops quickly, but once installed, it needed
to accomplish its goal of efficiently ejecting Saddam Hussein's forces from
Kuwait with little lose to American troops or weaponry.One effective battle plan was established
and called for 1) precursors 2.) massive air strikes and 3.) ground
warfare.Each level of this plan
incorporated technology developed by RMA in the '70s and '80s.

It is important to recap how
each element of the plan played in the outcome of the war.The precursors, mainly Tomahawk Cruise
missiles, were fired from one of the 60 plus United States' warships situated
in the Persian Gulf They disabled most of the Iraqi communications and radar
infrastructure and no American lives were put on the line.This created, as former Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff General Shalikashvili put it, "an electronic
window," for the F- I 17A Stealth Fighters to fly sorties to further
dismantle communications, industry, military headquarters, and main highways.Once the Stealths had destroyed most vital
targets, the air attacks started in earnest.Using F-14s, F-15s, F-4s, F-18s, countless refueling tankers, AWACS and
JSTARS, the allies bombarded Iraqi targets twenty-four hours a day.This absolutely demoralized the Iraqi ground
forces.T-72 commanders instructed
their crews to dig their tanks into the desert sand to hide them from allied
planes.This was a mistake.Infrared heat sensors on satellites were
able to spot the tanks when it turned dusk.As the desert began to cool, the tanks were still warm from absorbing
heat during the hot day.They showed up
like a sore thumb and the planes destroyed them at night.Once the ground warfare was started, it
lasted four days.American tank
divisions destroyed Iraqi forces at will.The United States had better armor made from depleted uranium, better
munitions that could shoot further, better sighting that could accurately
pinpoint a target, faster forces and was better trained.All of these were direct products of RMA
started after the Vietnam conflict.This brings us to the political aspects of RMA.After the Vietnam War, there was a bitter
resentment toward the United States' armed forces.The military had not been effectively trained for guerrilla
warfare and the American people viewed it as a failure.Over the following two decades, especially
under the leadership of President Reagan and President Bush, the goal was to
re-instill confidence in United States troops, technology, and training.The technology aspect was RMA.The effort to push RMA was mainly from Dr. William Perry
who went on to become the Secretary of Defense.Perry was instrumental in creating these "black
programs" that gave the armed forces unparalleled capabilities.During the late '70s, the '80s, and early
'90s, the stealth program, precision munitions, and more advanced censors that
gave the commanders better battlefield awareness were all programs that gave
the military a distinct advantage.This
advantage helped overwhelming defeat aggressors in Panama and Iraq when they
first were tested.The capabilities and
success helped boost confidence in the military and demonstrated that the
technology could work.Creating such
programs under RMA however comes with a tremendous amount of political red
tape.Getting funds allocated from
Congress is a big enough problem in itself, but information on many of these
highly classified programs often are not allowed to be circulated.The popular military belief is that the less
that know, the better.However, this irritates
congress people who are very reluctant to give billions of dollars to a program
that they cannot see or touch.

FNTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE
EAST-

The United States has both
real and perceived interests in the Middle East.These include economic, political, and militaristic concerns that
are vital to the United States.The
most blatant tangible interest is oil.Pure and simple oil is beyond plentiful in the region.Underneath the desert sand of Iraq, Kuwait,
Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and many more lies the largest
concentration of oil.Of course the use
of oil is everywhere.It enables
transportation, electricity, and heating.Without it the world and all it components would be paralyzed and left
nearly useless.The most serious, in
the eyes of the United States, would be the crippling of the armed forces.This would make the nation vulnerable both
foreign and domestically.Therefore a prime concern for the United
States is that the regions oil supply is well guarded and maintained.It noteworthy to acknowledge that the armed
forces have stockpiled a substantial amount of oil in the event that the oil
market collapse as it did in the mid seventies or a hostile invasion shifts the
balance power as seen with Iraq.

Security is another critical
interest.This is more of a fuzzy area
as the definition of security is vague.It could mean any number of things, but in this case it means the
absence of conflict, including war and terrorism both within and outside the
borders of the United States.Cases
like the bombing of the Cobar Towers in 1996, the bombing of the World Trade
Center in New York in 1992, the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in
1986, and the bombing of two American embassies in August of 1998 all involved
Middle East ties and have led to the questioning of United States
security.A major part of the American
armed services is forward deployment.If the United States cannot put its troops in foreign countries such as
Germany and Saudi Arabia, than its resolve is considerably weakened.The terrorist acts mentioned above were
efforts on the part of the Middle East parties to curtail American deployment
to their region.They feel that if they
can scare the United States, then maybe forces will be retreated.However, whether the United States likes it
or not, being the lone superpower in the world requires America to assume some
world policing responsibility.The
forward deployment ensures that the forces will be ready for any conflict
around the world.Therefore it is
paramount that the United States have personnel in the region to be prepared
for any conflict, but also to protect those troops who are waiting for the next
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Qaddafi, or Saddam.This is what is called a "Preventive Defense" in the corners
of the military.After the end of the
Gulf War, the United Nations (LJN) placed sanctions on Iraq to prevent it from
building weapons of mass destruction.By doing this, the LTN (in this case being an international extension of
the United States), is able to hopefully "prevent" more conflict down
the road and maintain security for the world's population.However, the recent refusal by the Iraqi
government to permit the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) inspectors
to search for evidence that weapons of mass destruction are being produced as
pushed a confrontation to almost inevitable.Above all else, the United States is concerned with bringing peace to
the region.If there were less
conflicts in the Middle East it would not only save the country monetarily in
short-run with not having to spend on troops deployment and fighting costs, but
also human capital of bright American lives.The United States would also be able to earn money long-run from peace
as American companies could develop more in the region.

CAPABILITY STRENGTHS IN THE
MFDDLE EAST:

The Gulf War demonstrated
that a qualitative advantage can have a tremendous impact on a quantitative
one.The capability of the United
States' military will have a tremendous affect on the post-Gulf War
period.The strengths will shape what
the interests of the U. S. are in the region and what role it will take.The list includes:

- DECOUPLING OF POLITICAL AND MILITARY
RESPONSIBILITY.Most wars that are
fought usually have turmoil in command.The question of who is in charge of what leads to controversy as tension
increases between political and military leadership.However, during the Gulf War, the United States forces fought
with exceptionally effective delegation of responsibility for military
decisions to military commanders.

- UNITY OF COMMAND: The planning and
operational control of all Coalition forces had a high degree of central
command.There was no division of
command or separation of operations and intelligence.This was mainly due to the specifically assigned tasks each unit
or service was asked to accomplish.

- CREATION OF NEW AIR BATTLE CAPABILITIES:. Advances
in aircraft, air munitions, and
targeting censors developed from RMA have enabled the United States to rapidly suppress
air and ground-based defense
systems.

- COMBINED ARMS OPERATIONS, JOINT
OPERATIONS:The United States has
always been an advocate of usingall military services together in one
battle plane.This, however, does not
always work out.In the Gulf War the
armed forces were able to combine their capabilities to rapidly destroy the
enemy.

- EMPHASIS ON MANEUVER: After the
Vietnam conflict, the United States began to emphasize maneuvers and
deception.During the Gulf War, the
tactics used were far superior to the Iraqi's and gave the forces positional
advantage that help contain and destroy the enemy with more speed.

- EMPHASIS ON DECEIPTION AND
STRATEGICAL/TACTICAL INNOVATION:. This includes spy networks that can give
intelligence not only on tech capabilities, but also on the thinking process of
the enemy hierarchy.

-"24 HOUR WAR”: Once again the tech developed from RMA, such as
night vision and heat censors, enabled the Coalition to dominate the fighting,
especially at night.The war never
stopped and the Iraqis buckled under the relentless onslaught.

- INTEGRATION OF SPACE WARFARE:This includes satellites that enabled
the allies to see the overall battle plan in almost real time.This gave a huge advantage as the commanders
could see what exactly was going on at any given specific time.

- A NEW TEMPO OF SUSTAINABILITY:Having a "24 Hour" war puts
extreme pressure on the logistical side of fighting.Weapons, fuel, equipment needed to be sent all over the Middle
East and the supply teams did a fantastic job of keeping the war moving.

- technological
superiority in many critical areas of weaponry: This was the biggest
advantage to the allies.As mentioned
above on RMA, the new advancements demolished the Iraqi army with little
damage.

- REALISTIC COMBAT TRAINING AND USE OF
TECHNOLOGYAND SIMULA TION: This gives the troops, pilots, and planners a
glimpse of what fighting may be like in a certain theater.They are better prepared and there is less
risk for confusion when the real battle comes.

- ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARYIHIGHER ENTRYAND
CAREER STANDARDS:- This is a critical area.An all volunteer military can perform better.They want to be there and do the job.They are professionals who are heavily
trained and promoted on merit forcing them to perform well.

- EmPHsis
ON FORWARD LEADERSHIPAND DELEGA TION.United
State forces were led from the front of combat, not the rear as the
Iraqis.This gave a better
understanding of what was happening and allowed for the Coalition to be
aggressive.

- HEAvy
RELiANcE oNNCOsAND ENLisTED PERsoNNEL: The troops of the United
States, especially the Non-Commissioned Officers and the experienced enlisted
men, are better educated and trained enabling them to effectively lead and make
wise decisions in the field.

- HIGH DEGREE OF OVERALL READiNEss.The United States maintains the highest level of preparation
of any force in the world.This comes
from training and forward deployment.Forces can react in hours to a conflict any where in the world.

- CLEAR DOCTRINE FOR COLLA TERAL DAMAGE: By
avoiding Iraqi civilians, the United States was able to gain a political
victory out of the war.The Arab states
who had been wary of the United States for years, now saw that the military did
not alter its motives to punishing innocent people.This will go along way in creating a peaceful environment in the
region.

- MANAGEMENT OF MEDIA RELATIONS: The
military controlled the media during the Gulf War.

It
seemed to the public that they could see everything with the advent of mass communications
like T. V. broadcasts, such as CNN, or the internet.However, the opposite was true.What the public saw was what the military gave them.This was for two reasons.The first is that the media could be used as
propaganda to demonstrate how powerful and capable the forces were and
are.The second is that the Iraqis
could easily have gained valuable knowledge on troop totals, equipment
locations, or tactics.

CAPABILITY
WEAKNESSES IN THE MIDDLE EAST:

With
the successful end to the Gulf War, coupled with the collapse of the Soviet
Union the armed forces have faced the possibility of losing a substantial
amount of their capabilities.With the
collapse of the Soviet empire, as evident with the tearing down of the Berlin
Wall in December of 1989, the United Stated has enjoyed being the lone
superpower in the world.Some of the
weaknesses stem from the lack of effectively destroying enemy capabilities,
lack of military intelligence, or simply not being prepared as the United
States' military was trained and built to fight the Soviet Union in the plains
of Germany and Eastern Europe.

- A
ccEpTiNG THE TRUE POLI7ICS OF WAR: This means that the United States
cannot always count on defending strategic interests because of naked acts of
aggression like Iraq's attack on Kuwait.Tied to this concept is that popular, legislative, international support
are conditional and often volatile.

- INTERNAL SECURITY AND POLITICAL WARFARE: The
United States cannot rescue any Gulf government from its own people.Ultimately, the position of the United
States is dependent on the popular support available to each Gulf regime,
popular perception of that regime's legitimacy, and the extent to which each
Gulf government maintains a "social contract" with its people them
with security, jobs, and hope for the future.

-
IsLAmic ExTPEmism.The
United States has difficulty understanding the cultural, political, and
religious aspects of Islam.This
presents problems as to how to deal with the specific states such as Iraq and
Iran who will in all probability try to exploit the Western pro-Israeli culture
and discredit Southern Gulf states who do not share their views.

-
Low-iNTENsiTYREALism.The
RMA was designed to destroy weapons and facilities.However, low-intensity wars that require killing of people, not
things.The United States demonstrated
it had difficulty with this in Somalia and could continue to do so in the
Middle East.

- TAKING CASUAL TiEs. The United States public cannot and does not want
to see innocent American lives lost in a regional conflict.The success of the Gulf War was quite
impressive, however it cannot be expected every time.To maintain a role in the Middle East, the United States must be
able to accept some loss of lives.

- INFLICTING CASUALTiES: This is tied to low-intensity realism.The United States must come to grips that it
must engage in battles where the enemy will take a substantial loss of
life.The leaders of the country must
realize that, although there may be some short-term international backlash to
killing the enemy and not just their equipment, the military must maintain
credibility by engaging the soldiers of the enemy.

- COLLATERAL DAMAGE.The United States must be
sure of its targets.It cannot hit or
destroy civilians and their facilities.This leads to quite a gray area as leaders such Saddam Hussein put
civilians and prisoners of war against their will in military installations to
protect them from attack.

-
URRAN AND BUILT-UP AREA WARFARE. Western
forces are not trained or equipped to deal with sustained urban warfare in
populated areas in regional combat.

- MOUTAIN WARFARE AND WARFARE IN ROUGH
TERRAIN:Many of the systems that were successful during the Gulf War
were due to the fact that the terrain was flat and empty.If the opposite was true, like the case of
the Kurds afterthe war, the outcome would be much
less decisive.

- HOSTAGE TAKINC, AND
TERRoRism.The United States still has uncertain
capabilities with dealing with hostage and terrorists situations.

- SUDDEN ATTACK.Although the United States
is the most capable and ready force, Iraq established a paramount advantage by
capturing Kuwait without notice.Had
Saddam Hussein wanted, he could have made it very difficult for United States'
forces into the region if he had captured more land.

-
WEAPoN oF mAss DEsTRucTioN:. Little knowledge was known of Iraq's
capabilities before the war.Today,
Saddam Hussein still gives the United States and the United Nations the run
around when it comes to investigating.The extended region is very volatile as the nations are small, but have
extremely different cultures and populations.This was seen with the recent arms race that started last spring between
India and Pakistan.

-
EcoLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL WARFARE. Little preparation goes into
preventing this, however it is a major way to achieve large-scale damage and
civilian casualties.

-
LimiTs oFUNIcoopERATivE COALITION WARFARE. It might not always be as
easy as the Gulf War to get widespread international support.

- EXTENDED
CONFLICTANDoccupATioNwARFARE. The United States' public also does
not like long stays.The people want
the young men and women back as soon as the mission is accomplished.However, it certain situations like the case
with Iraq it is clear that there will be a need for a presence in the region
for some time to come.

NEED FOR STRATEGIC
COMMITMENT-

It is clear that the
United States will have to remain a power in the region to protect interests
around the globe.General H. Norman
Schwarzkopf, Commander in Chief, United States Central Command, talked about
the need for a strategic commitment in his hearing with the House of
Representatives' Committee on Armed Service after the Gulf War.He stated,

Looking ahead, it is plain to see that they key to
our continued access is the maintenance of a strong U.S. presence in the
region.This presence should be a
combination of forward deployed forces, prepositioning, security assistance,
and combined exercises.The weight
accorded each element may be open to discussion, but the necessity of each
element should not be questioned.

FUTURE GOAL

What the United States, and
the world community, should be working toward is a peaceful region united for the common purpose of economic
prosperity.The countries of the Middle
East are rich with resources.The money
earned from oil is tremendous.If the
region were able to stabilize politically and militaristically, the region
would boom.However, this concept often
eludes the leaders who are too busy trying to plot the demise of their
neighbors.If they simply realized that
all would gain from peace, there is no telling how much the countries could
prosper.Once the United States could
create a stable environment it would be able to offer suggestions of how to
capitalize on their missed opportunities.This however, its easier said then done since the United States presence
is not always welcomed with open arms and many of the countries in the region
cannot see eye to eye on anything.Yet
it still does give something to work toward.What the U.S. should work toward then is to let the region prosper on
its own without political interference and a minimal military presence.The country cannot and does not want to
remain a police force in the region.It
costs too much and puts lives at risk.

RECOMMENDATION

Therefore, the question is
how does the U.S. accomplish these goals.A good start would be to establish a regional peacekeeping organization
that would ensure peace and economic stability.This brings with it both benefits and problems.The advantages are that it would open up
dialogue.This was started right
before, during, and after the Gulf War as the United States began to forge new
bonds with Arab countries in the region.As a result of the Gulf War the United States is poised to accomplish
this goal of diplomacy through one regional organization.The foundation to this was supported by the
Gulf War according to General Schwarzkopf who stated in his hearing with the
Armed Services Committee,

We have both solidified
existing and established more favorable relationships with key regional
states.The realization that the United
States is a good friend and staunch ally will go a long way towards insuring
our access to critical facilities in the region.The introduction and sustainment of our Desert Storm forces would
have been immeasurably more difficult without the regional bases, ports and
infrastructure which were made available to us.Quite frankly, without that access, the defeat of Iraq would have
been a far greater challenge.

The major drawback to this
plan is that it would be very tough for all the major players to agree to work
together for the benefit of all.It
would be a tremendous feat of diplomacy to unite Israel with Iraq or Kuwait
with Iran.Although it might not all be
one large group at first, the organization could start if say five and work to
bring new nations on board.These
countries could
establish favored nation status amongst each other and open their markets to
free trade amongst the others thereby gaining from comparative advantage.

REFERENCES

Abboushi, W. F. Political Systems of the Mi&lle East in
the 20th Century.New York: Dodd,

Mead and Company, 1970.

Amirahmadi, Hooshang,
ed.The
United States and the Middle Eavt: A Searchfor New

"The Impact of the
Persian Gulf Wal- and the Decline of the Soviet Union on how the United States
Does its Defense Business." Hearing before the Committee on Governmental
Affairs United States Senate: 1991.